I said in my last post and I would go offline for two years which is still true, but I needed to share this thought though.
When foids say we are not entitled to sex or intimacy, then what they really mean is:
We are not entitled to interfere with women't biological urges who tell them to reject sub-7s.
But... women are not entitled to supress men's biological urges either. Women are not entitled for us to behave castrated cucks. They are not entitled that we deny our nature.
And here's a problem: If women argue on this level, then so can we. And both our biological urges are fundamentally incompatible. What happens then?
The weak should fear the strong.
Might makes right. This is how arguing on the biological level works.
So, when women say we are not entitled to sex (means, they are entitled to live out their hypergamous ultra-picky biology by rejecting us for our perceived flaws), then we can argue on the same level: They are not entitled for us to deny our biology either. The logical consequence of this kind of argumentation ends with violence and then the abolishment of women's right and patriarchy. Because we are strong and they are not. 5% Chads can't protect them.
I save such thoughts on my computer to post them when I come online again but atm I only have my smart phone so I might as well post it here.
This is now finally my last post.
When foids say we are not entitled to sex or intimacy, then what they really mean is:
We are not entitled to interfere with women't biological urges who tell them to reject sub-7s.
But... women are not entitled to supress men's biological urges either. Women are not entitled for us to behave castrated cucks. They are not entitled that we deny our nature.
And here's a problem: If women argue on this level, then so can we. And both our biological urges are fundamentally incompatible. What happens then?
The weak should fear the strong.
Might makes right. This is how arguing on the biological level works.
So, when women say we are not entitled to sex (means, they are entitled to live out their hypergamous ultra-picky biology by rejecting us for our perceived flaws), then we can argue on the same level: They are not entitled for us to deny our biology either. The logical consequence of this kind of argumentation ends with violence and then the abolishment of women's right and patriarchy. Because we are strong and they are not. 5% Chads can't protect them.
I save such thoughts on my computer to post them when I come online again but atm I only have my smart phone so I might as well post it here.
This is now finally my last post.
